Dustin Contradicts Boss Brad

How important is local television to Brad Wall? Well, it sure was last last spring during CTV’s ‘Save Local TV’ campaign — Bell Globemedia’s attempt to get an extra $10 a month from you cable bill.

Go to this link (savelocaltv.ctv.ca), head to the bottom of the page, and click on the video link for Premier Brad Wall’s testimonial.

Then, compare that to what Dustin Duncan, Saskatchewan’s culture minister, said yesterday about why the province shouldn’t fund SCN. (prairie dog)

So it’s okay to force cable consumers in Saskatchewan to pay higher cable bills so they can increase Bell Globemedia’s profits in Toronto, but it’s not okay to spend the equivelant of $5 a head to maintain distinctive Saskatchewan programming.

Brad Wall is Premier of Saskatchewan.

Author: Stephen LaRose

2006 winner of the Canadian Association of University Teachers's Award of Excellence in Journalism for a bunch of prairie dog stuff. Invited into the best homes in Regina. Once.

15 thoughts on “Dustin Contradicts Boss Brad”

  1. SCN is more popular than the Saskatchewan Party MLA’s realize. This is a bad move. No opportunity for alternate service continuation was even remotely considered. Why not look at handing it over to a Community co-operative effort. Sound familiar … co-ops have a long history here in Saskatchewan. Regardless, those so inclined can further raise their voices (collectively), here:

  2. duh
    no more weekly replays of the tommy douglas story and native slum adventures
    both easily cost the taxpayers a fortune
    hopefully replacement venues can be found for the distance education oppotunities which went by the wayside
    next up cbc 1 hopes

  3. “Culture” what’s that, and why should the government take money from us through threat of force to pay for it?

    BTW you can cancel Bell-Globemedia’s voluntary service if you want to.

  4. It needs to be mentioned:

    60% of TV programming is pure crap
    20% of TV programming is just plain crap
    10% is barely watchable
    10% is actually pretty good.

  5. Why can none of these fantastic and oh so valuable to the people of Saskatchewan ‘services’ make it without a handout?
    Surely if the people of Saskatchewan felt this was so valuable they would choose for themselves to fund it directly themsleves, you know, vote with their wallets?

    Seems like one heck of a democratic idea to me!

    The people get to decide where their money gets spent.
    That, for some reason, frightens the hell out of socialist, which is odd, since they are always the ones ranting about power to the people and all that.

  6. Sulphur, does money grow on trees?
    Oddly enough the money given to these boobs has to come from somewhere.
    What could be fairer and more democratic than letting the taxpayers fund the things they wish to fund?
    If they want to support local tv, then by God let them, if they don’t want to support something that should be their choice as well.
    Television is a long way from being an essential service after all.
    Why vote in politicians to spend your money for you on local tv when you could simply send the money to the local tv stations yourself?
    Seems pretty obvious, doesn’t it?
    Or do you acknowledge that people really don’t support half the BS they pay for with their taxes?
    Ahh, there’s the rub.

  7. Stan. It’s a nice fantasy that every dollar of tax money should pass a citizen referendum before being spent, which I think is more or less what you want. But that is an unrealistic expectation. We don’t live in a village of 100 people. We live in a country with 30-plus million people. Since spending decisions need to be taken to keep this massive, unwieldy endeavour known as Canada functioning kind of smoothly, we have elected politicians and civil servants who advocate for our views and contribute their knowledge, respectively, to direct public spending and keep our country functioning.

    Representative democracy bolstered by the expertise and and skill of a civil service is not a bad system. And we get our say at the polls. Having said that, I’d like more democracy, too. But I want it through proportional representation, which would bring a more representative collection of politicians into government.

    Regardless: you wanted SCN dead. The democratically elected government killed it for you. You should be happy! The system worked!

  8. Stan, you said:
    “What could be fairer and more democratic than letting the taxpayers fund the things they wish to fund?”

    and I agree. Many taxpayers are saying that they want to fund (using their taxes, yeah) SCN. What’s the problem? I think that lots of things are valuable, and I pay taxes (out of my wallet!) so that those things can be funded (or “handed out” to, as you put it).

  9. Didn’t watch a lot of SCN, but saving 2.4 million today and cutting a bunch of jobs only to lose 12 million in revenue every year to follow is bad business. It looked good in the papers to show they were making cuts on something not everyone watched, but the millions of dollars that no longer come here is backwards.

  10. JB, the problem is that may people don’t want to fund SCN.
    What could be fairer than letting those who want it to fund themselves and those who think it’s garbage aren’t forced to fund it?

    It’s the same with arts funding, if you wish to give your money to someone who masturbates and hangs the results in jars in trees, then go crazy, give him all the money wish.
    (And yes, your tax dollars did fund this).
    Nice work if you can get it I guess.
    But some of us who wouldn’t fund that voluntarily are forced to fund it through arts grants.

    Why can’t people decide for themselves what their culture is and fund it themselves instead of having some bureaucrat make those decisions for them?
    Seems fair and democratic, doesn’t it?
    It’s the same money, it doesn’t grow on trees.
    You can fund what you wish yourself or your money can be collected in taxes and some government shmoe decides for you what your culture is.

    And I thought everyone was supposed to be pro choice.

  11. Stan: once again you misunderstand how taxation and government works. A majority of citizens do not and SHOULD not get a veto over every government decision.

    (And a good thing too: none of us are experts in all the areas of society and the economy. That’s why we elect representatives and have a civil service with diverse expertise.)

    We have our say at the polls every few years. I had mine, you had yours and SCN is cancelled so you should be happy.

    Regardless, I don’t care for your hostile, cheap-shot characterization of the arts (and I have no idea what masturbation artwork you’re talking about anyway. Something to Google later). It’s fine that you don’t like art. But there are (I’m guessing) 10-20 thousand people in this province, minimum, who vehemently DO want their taxes going to the arts. Even gross, weirdo art.

    It is mean to suggest that your fellow citizens have no right to have their interests served.

    The anti-tax and anti-culture attitude you show in your comments (and thank you for your contribitions to the discussion, by the way) is thoughtless and selfish. You should learn to be more tolerant and open-minded.

Comments are closed.